Robin,
On 05/09/2012 04:10 AM, Robin LaFontaine wrote:
Camilla, Patrick,
Camilla has raised some good points and I would support
Patrick's reply. I think it is quite likely that none of the
current proposals will be a perfect fit with requirements, but
it would certainly be useful to indicate where each falls short,
as Camilla suggests. At this stage it is not possible to predict
whether or not those shortcomings can be addressed, I think we
will have to see when we get there! The committee may want to
allow some time for issues to be addressed before they form
their final conclusion/recommendation.
The select committee is just getting its feet under itself so we are
a long way from final
conclusions or recommendations.
Camilla I suspect has the
greatest domain experience with this issue, Thorsten with the prior
discussions of the sub-committee and myself, long service on the TC. So, we
are still sorting through documents and getting comfortable with each
other's styles.
Hopefully we can start doing
an update every week or so at TC meetings on where we are at the moment.
In looking at requirements please do not forget the charter of
the subcommittee - that is what we were aiming for originally,
though there has been discussion about whether that was too
ambitious. But it was what the ADC SC were asked to do by the
TC. Perhaps the Select Committee will suggest a change in focus
by a revision of the charter, though I am not clear whether or
not that is within its remit.
Perhaps speaking out of turn but I sense that the select committee
is less concerned with
charter issues and more concerned with providing the TC with a detailed technical
evaluation/recommendation and depending on the TC's choice, a way forward.
Hope you are having a great week!
Patrick
Robin
On 26/04/2012 11:45, Patrick Durusau wrote:
Camilla,
On 04/26/2012 05:53 AM, C. Boemann wrote:
Hi
I was trying to find the scope of what it is the selection
committee is
supposed to do. As I understand it. We should look at the
proposal and select
one or possibly reject all and come up with something new. It
's the last part
I'm wondering about.
You see, I already have quite some experience in this field,
and see shortfalls
in all 3 alternatives. That doesn't mean we can't select one
or the other if
need be, but it would be nice to know how much our hands are
tied.
Well, the TC has had "issues" with coming up with an exact scope
for either the SC or this "select" committee. ;-)
On the other hand if all we do is come
up with yet another proposal, then we
are just prolonging the process even further. So at the very
least we should
(also) come up with recommendations about the 3 proposals on
the table.
Not sure that I agree that another proposal of necessity
prolongs the process but do agree we need to address the three
proposals on the table.
Thinking that by addressing those proposals, any "other"
proposal would be an outgrowth of addressing shortcomings in
those proposals.
As far as our hands being "tied," I think that depends on how
creative we are as a select committee.
For example:
1) I am posting a call today for implementers of ODF to disclose
their experiences with customer demand for change tracking. Not
developer experience but customer demand. (Aside to
implementers, this isn't the crown jewels of how you do UIs,
etc. Give it up.)
2) The select committee should evaluate the proposals in terms
of those customer requirements.
3) Where omissions or issues come up, the select committee
should recommend changes in proposals.
4) The select committee delivers its evaluation of the
proposals, along with either a recommendation on one with any
proposed changes or a new proposal.
I will post the call for customer requirements for change
tracking to the TC list.
Hope everyone is having a great week!
Patrick
best regards
Camilla Boemann
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: office-collab-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: office-collab-help@lists.oasis-open.org
--
-- -----------------------------------------------------------------
Robin La Fontaine, Director, DeltaXML Ltd "Experts in information change"
T: +44 1684 592 144 E: robin.lafontaine@deltaxml.com
http://www.deltaxml.com
Registered in England 02528681 Reg. Office: Monsell House, WR8 0QN, UK
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To
unsubscribe, e-mail:
office-collab-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
office-collab-help@lists.oasis-open.org
--
Patrick Durusau
patrick@durusau.net
Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)
OASIS Technical Advisory Board (TAB) - member
Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau
|